Hozzl: Kareem Davis

Kareem Davisvoted for this!

HR Bill 2652 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for relocating manufacturing to the United States, permanent full expensing for qualified property, and for other purposes.Updated 1 day ago

Purpose and Summary

Chamber: House

Introduced date: 2025-04-03

Bill 119 HR 2652, also known as the "Manufacturing American Prosperity Act," aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in order to encourage comp...

anies to relocate their manufacturing operations to the United States. The bill proposes providing incentives for companies that bring their manufacturing back to the US, including permanent full expensing for qualified property. Under this bill, companies that relocate their manufacturing operations to the US would be eligible for tax incentives that would allow them to fully expense qualified property, meaning they could deduct the full cost of investments in new equipment and facilities in the year they are made. This is intended to make it more financially attractive for companies to bring their manufacturing back to the US and create jobs for American workers. In addition to providing incentives for relocating manufacturing to the US, the bill also includes provisions for other purposes related to promoting American manufacturing and economic growth. The bill is designed to boost the US economy by encouraging companies to invest in domestic manufacturing and create jobs for American workers. Overall, Bill 119 HR 2652 seeks to stimulate the US manufacturing sector by providing tax incentives for companies to relocate their operations to the US and invest in new equipment and facilities. The bill aims to promote economic growth and create jobs for American workers by incentivizing companies to bring their manufacturing back to the US.

Recent Activity

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Alternative Names

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for relocating manufacturing to the United States, permanent full expensing for qualified property, and for other purposes.

Associated Legislation

undefined

Policy Areas

undefined

Potential Impact

undefined

Sponsors and Supporters

Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21]

Cosponsors and Supporters

Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]

Committees and Subcommittees

Ways and Means Committee

Variations and Revisions

undefined

Kareem Davisliked this

S Bill 1206 A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to prohibit the issuance of national injunctions, and for other purposes.Updated 4 hours ago

Purpose and Summary

Chamber: Senate

Introduced date: 2025-03-31

Bill 119 s 1206, also known as the "National Injunction Reform Act of 2021," aims to amend title 28 of the United States Code in order to prohibit the...

issuance of national injunctions. National injunctions are court orders that prevent the enforcement of a law or regulation not only against the parties involved in the case, but also against anyone else who may be affected by the law. The bill seeks to limit the scope of injunctions issued by federal courts to only apply to the parties involved in the case, rather than applying nationwide. This is intended to prevent a single judge from blocking a law or regulation from being enforced across the entire country, which some argue can lead to inconsistent legal standards and undermine the authority of other courts. Supporters of the bill argue that national injunctions can create confusion and uncertainty in the legal system, as different courts may issue conflicting rulings on the same issue. They also argue that national injunctions can be used as a tool for political activism, allowing a single judge to halt the implementation of a law or regulation that has been passed by Congress or the executive branch. Opponents of the bill, however, argue that national injunctions are an important tool for protecting individual rights and ensuring that the government does not overstep its authority. They argue that national injunctions can be necessary in cases where a law or regulation may violate the Constitution or infringe on the rights of individuals across the country. Overall, the National Injunction Reform Act of 2021 is a controversial piece of legislation that seeks to address the issue of national injunctions and their impact on the legal system. It will be important to closely monitor the progress of this bill as it moves through Congress and to consider the arguments of both supporters and opponents as it is debated and potentially enacted into law.

Recent Activity

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Alternative Names

A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to prohibit the issuance of national injunctions, and for other purposes.

Associated Legislation

undefined

Policy Areas

undefined

Potential Impact

undefined

Sponsors and Supporters

Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

Cosponsors and Supporters

Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]

Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC]

Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

Sen. Justice, James C. [R-WV]

Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA]

Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]

Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]

Sen. Moody, Ashley [R-FL]

Sen. Moreno, Bernie [R-OH]

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]

Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]

Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]

Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]

Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]

Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC]

Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

Sen. Justice, James C. [R-WV]

Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA]

Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]

Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]

Sen. Moody, Ashley [R-FL]

Sen. Moreno, Bernie [R-OH]

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]

Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]

Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]

Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]

Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]

Sen. Banks, Jim [R-IN]

Sen. Husted, Jon [R-OH]

Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]

Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC]

Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

Sen. Justice, James C. [R-WV]

Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA]

Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]

Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]

Sen. Moody, Ashley [R-FL]

Sen. Moreno, Bernie [R-OH]

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]

Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]

Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]

Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]

Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]

Sen. Banks, Jim [R-IN]

Sen. Husted, Jon [R-OH]

Sen. Sheehy, Tim [R-MT]

Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]

Committees and Subcommittees

Judiciary Committee

Variations and Revisions

undefined

Kareem Davisthinks this is important

HRES Bill 257 Expressing support for the designation of March 2025 as "Music in Our Schools Month".Updated 5 days ago

Purpose and Summary

Chamber: House

Introduced date: 2025-03-26

Bill 119 HRES 257, also known as the "Music in Our Schools Month" resolution, is a piece of legislation that expresses support for designating March 20...

Kareem Davisliked this

HR Bill 1152 Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness ActUpdated 21 hours ago

Purpose and Summary

Chamber: House

Introduced date: 2025-02-10

Bill 119 HR 1152, also known as the Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act, aims to streamline and modernize the process of filing and paying taxes...

for individuals and businesses. The bill proposes to require the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to provide electronic filing and payment options for all tax forms, including those that are currently only available in paper form. The bill also seeks to ensure that taxpayers are not penalized for using electronic filing and payment methods, by prohibiting the IRS from charging additional fees for these services. Additionally, the bill includes provisions to protect taxpayer information and ensure the security of electronic transactions. Supporters of the bill argue that electronic filing and payment options can save time and money for both taxpayers and the IRS, while also reducing the risk of errors and fraud. They believe that making these options more accessible and user-friendly will encourage more taxpayers to take advantage of them. Opponents of the bill may argue that implementing electronic filing and payment systems could be costly and time-consuming for the IRS, and that some taxpayers may prefer to continue using paper forms. However, proponents of the bill maintain that the long-term benefits of modernizing the tax filing process outweigh any initial challenges. Overall, the Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act aims to make the tax filing process more efficient, convenient, and secure for all taxpayers, while also bringing the IRS into the digital age.

Recent Activity

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

Alternative Names

Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the application of the mailbox rule to documents and payments electronically submitted to the Internal Revenue Service.

Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the application of the mailbox rule to documents and payments electronically submitted to the Internal Revenue Service.

Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the application of the mailbox rule to documents and payments electronically submitted to the Internal Revenue Service.

Associated Legislation

undefined

Policy Areas

Taxation

Potential Impact

Internet, web applications, social media

Tax administration and collection, taxpayers

Sponsors and Supporters

Rep. LaHood, Darin [R-IL-16]

Cosponsors and Supporters

Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1]

Rep. Feenstra, Randy [R-IA-4]

Rep. Schneider, Bradley Scott [D-IL-10]

Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]

Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19]

Committees and Subcommittees

Ways and Means Committee

Variations and Revisions

Kareem Davisvoted for this!

S Bill 951 Stop Comstock ActUpdated 3 days ago

Purpose and Summary

Chamber: Senate

Introduced date: 2025-03-11

Bill 119 s 951, also known as the "Revise Title 18 and Tariff Act Amendment Act," aims to make revisions to several sections of the United States Code...

and the Tariff Act of 1930. Specifically, the bill seeks to amend sections 552, 1461, and 1462 of title 18, which pertain to various criminal offenses, as well as section 305 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which deals with the importation of goods. The proposed changes in the bill are intended to update and modernize these laws to better address current issues and challenges facing the United States. The revisions aim to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of these statutes in combating criminal activities and regulating trade and commerce. In addition to the revisions to the aforementioned sections, the bill also includes provisions for other purposes, although specific details on these additional purposes are not provided in the summary. Overall, Bill 119 s 951 seeks to enhance the legal framework governing criminal offenses and trade regulations in the United States, with the goal of promoting a more secure and prosperous society.

Recent Activity

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Alternative Names

A bill to revise sections 552, 1461, and 1462 of title 18, United States Code, and section 305 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1305), and for other purposes.

Stop Comstock Act

A bill to revise sections 552, 1461, and 1462 of title 18, United States Code, and section 305 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1305), and for other purposes.